Controversial call at end of OHSAA State Final

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I had an intentional fouling situation this past weekend. 7th grade boys I think, a player (A1) ran over to me after a timeout and said "Mr. Ref we are going to try and foul B55 on the other team after we score". I replied "Ok, make sure he has the ball and you go for the ball". He said nothing, but ran to his place. Team A scored, Team B inbounded the ball and a guard dribbled up the floor. Sure enough, a Team A player (A3) was trying to hug B55 on his way up the floor. Neither my partner or I called it. Within a few seconds A2 fouled the Team B dribbler. I called it, we set up for FT's and I went directly to the coach. He was already looking expectantly at me and said "we can't foul #55?" I replied "You can, but it would considered an Intentional foul. He has to have the ball or be involved in play somehow, not just running up the court. High schools rules are different from NBA -- you can't Hack-a-Shaq here". The coach gave a dejected sigh but nodded. We kept playing and B55 got the ball through normal play and they fouled him. But Team A still lost.

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

You should have called an IPF when Team A was fouling B55 away from the play.

Some people worry about trying to determine when the kids are old enough and the coaches experienced enough for actual rules enforcement. I see that as problematic because it is naturally subjective.

Instead, I would advise any official to focus upon his role in the contest. Be a neutral arbiter: protect the safety of all players and properly and fairly enforce the rules.

If the league/event hires real referees for the contests, then the real rules should be used and enforced. This isn't a Harlem Globetrotters show. Officials aren't props or coaches on the floor.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

... slight contact which would not have been deemed a foul previously in the game should not be whistled at this point. To do so is unfair.

Eh, if a team is clearly trying to foul and is able to make that "slight contact," I'm getting that immediately. Otherwise, things can escalate pretty quickly when defenders take the "Ok, then I guess I need to step up the contact" tack.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ODog

Eh, if a team is clearly trying to foul and is able to make that "slight contact," I'm getting that immediately. Otherwise, things can escalate pretty quickly when defenders take the "Ok, then I guess I need to step up the contact" tack.

The slippery slope argument and fear-mongering!

Again, there is a proper way to foul. If a team cannot execute that, then officials shouldn't be helping them. That's favoritism of the team which is behind in the contest.

Rather than escalating to a horrible mess, it is much more logical to believe that a middle ground will occur in which the defensive player actually fouls the opponent instead of just causes slight contact. That is when the official should properly make the call.

Officials should call actual fouls near the end of games and not live in fear of what might happen.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The slippery slope argument and fear-mongering!

Again, there is a proper way to foul. If a team cannot execute that, then officials shouldn't be helping them. That's favoritism of the team which is behind in the contest.

Rather than escalating to a horrible mess, it is much more logical to believe that a middle ground will occur in which the defensive player actually fouls the opponent instead of just causes slight contact. That is when the official should properly make the call.

Officials should call actual fouls near the end of games and not live in fear of what might happen.

Two hands on a ball handler is an "automatic", right? Just tag the ball handler with two hands, always gets the whistle here, no matter how slight the contact. No need to "go for the ball".

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Two hands on a ball handler is an "automatic", right? Just tag the ball handler with two hands, always gets the whistle here, no matter how slight the contact. No need to "go for the ball".

The defense wanted to foul 55. He was not the ball handler. Saying go for the ball is another way to say make sure player has the ball. As i said, i would tell a kid who talks to me as Arem mentioned, "dont just go grabbing 55 or shoving him if he doesn't have ball." If they do it after that i will call it intentional. In 7th grade the kids should know the rules and certainly a coach should.

In a 5th grade game i might do something different. Ultimately, its jr high basketball. If they have to learn you cant go grab somebody by me calling intentional foul then it is what it is. Better they learn now than later....

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by BigCat

The defense wanted to foul 55. He was not the ball handler. Saying go for the ball is another way to say make sure player has the ball. As i said, i would tell a kid who talks to me as Arem mentioned, "dont just go grabbing 55 or shoving him if he doesn't have ball." If they do it after that i will call it intentional. In 7th grade the kids should know the rules and certainly a coach should.

In a 5th grade game i might do something different. Ultimately, its jr high basketball. If they have to learn you cant go grab somebody by me calling intentional foul then it is what it is. Better they learn now than later....

I was just responding to Nevada's post about the proper way to foul. When the refs know what you're doing, tagging the ballhandler with two hands is all you need to do.